The Silicon - Meet the A4

Before the first iPad was ever unboxed, photos had already leaked of its dissection. Admittedly, I was relieved as it meant I didn’t have to risk destroying mine to figure out how to get inside the chassis. Why was getting inside Apple’s new tablet such a big deal? Because it’s using Apple’s brand new SoC.

It’s called the A4 because it is the 4th generation SoC designed by Apple. That would make the silicon in the iPhone 3GS the A3, the A2 would be what’s in the iPhone and perhaps A1 was an older iPod chip? Either way, the A4 was the first we heard of Apple’s naming system.

For months leading up to the iPad announcement everyone assumed that Apple’s acquisition of PA Semi meant that the company was going to ditch Samsung and come forth with its own killer SoC. Would it be an out-of-order Cortex A9 design? Or would it be truly custom, similar to what Marvell or Qualcomm have done with their Armada and Snapdragon lines?

As with everything involving the iPad, rumors of the device’s silicon ran rampant. But the idea of Apple doing their own microprocessor architecture for the iPad was disappointing to me. To understand why, we have to look at Apple COO, Tim Cook’s recent statements on why Apple has been successful:

“We are the most focused company that I know of or have read of or have any knowledge of. We say no to good ideas every day. We say no to great ideas in order to keep the amount of things we focus on very small in number so that we can put enormous energy behind the ones we do choose.”

Tim was talking about products there, but I believe his statement is applicable to the A4 as well. Apple is not a microprocessor company, nor does Apple want to toss its hat in with the likes of Intel, NVIDIA, Qualcomm and TI as an SoC maker. History has shown us that the only way to be a successful microprocessor company is to be able to subsidize the high cost of designing a powerful architecture over an extremely large install base. That’s why x86 survived, and it’s why the ARM business model works.

Designing high performance SoCs just for use in the iPad and iPhone just doesn’t make sense. In the short term, perhaps, but in the long run it would mean that Apple would have to grow the microprocessor side of its business considerably. That means tons of engineers, more resources that aren’t product focused, and honestly re-inventing the wheel a lot.

The fact that the A4 appears to be little more than a 45nm, 1GHz Cortex A8 paired with a PowerVR SGX GPU tells me that Apple isn’t off its rocker. I don’t exactly know what Apple is doing with all of these CPU and GPU engineers in house, but licensing tech from the companies who have experience in building the architectures is still on the menu.

The A4 is a typical smartphone SoC. It’s got CPU, GPU and DRAM all on a single package. It also appears to be the same size as your typical smartphone SoC, meaning there’s a good chance we’ll see this thing in the next iPhone. The A4 has 256MB of on-package DRAM, just like the current iPhone 3GS SoC. Remember that memory is used for the OS, all applications as well as video memory. It’s a testament to just how lightweight the iPhone OS is.

Rushed, the iPad Case & iTunes The iPad and its Performance
Comments Locked

108 Comments

View All Comments

  • fflow - Friday, April 9, 2010 - link

    It's a tempting device in many ways, but useless to me unless I can use it to stream videos from my home server. Are there any DLNA apps for the iPhone/iPad OS that work well?
  • medi01 - Saturday, April 10, 2010 - link

    "I've always called the iPhone OS a very efficient UI. The ease at which you can perform primary tasks on the iPhone is what I mean by that. "

    Yep, copy & paste in particular... :)))
  • Adul - Sunday, April 11, 2010 - link

    Tempting as it may be, I think I will wait to see what a few other devices coming down the pipe will offer. It could be an interesting year.
  • MrJustin5 - Sunday, April 18, 2010 - link

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyEhWeAseSo

    Anand, once again, a great extensive review.

    But honestly, a 30-year-old Techie who is neither a Mickey$oft Fan or an Apple Fan, could not care less about this simplified and over-priced laptop-wanna-be.

    It is not "magical" as Steve Jobs said a number of times durring his Keynote speech about this gimmicky tablet, which is basically a giant iTouch.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyEhWeAseSo

    Please do not do so many reviews of Apple products. It is NOT top priority, they are NOT life-changing or meaningful products. They are TOYS with a few functional abilities. Like a Corvette is a toy... its fast, it looks good, its expensive, but its also functional to haul a few groceries home and transport you long distances. But in th end, its an expensive toy and so is this iPad.
  • tikblang - Friday, August 6, 2010 - link

    I bought a $2 white HP keyboard from Fry's 3 years ago, (that was the last time I visit an electronic retailer). Can I just buy a $3 female-2-female USB gender changer and use it to connect a reg KeyBoard ? What about a $10 trip-lite USB to PS2 dongle to connect a PS2-KB/Mouse?

    I do not like new gadget (lose faith in technology) but got one (and LIKE it) from a Symantec seminar.
  • AlfieJr - Saturday, March 19, 2011 - link

    i do get it. AnandTech is a geek site, and this iPad2 review is written by geeks for geeks, evaluating the product by geek criteria. ok. there is some meaty tech stuff in it.

    but you don't get it, apparently. the iPad is a consumer product. which the review never acknowledges. instead we get lots of a very self-centered discussion about its suitability for one user - you, the geek.

    but it's not designed for people like you. it's designed for dummies like me. it's not a PC replacement or wannabe (tho perhaps the Android tabs are). it's like comparing a car to a small plane. yes some people can drive/fly both, and they are both travel machines. but one is designed for dummies to operate and enjoy, and the other is for pilots with skills.

    you need to step outside your own frame once in a while. because the big question the iPad begs for analysis is - is this really the dawn of a new "computing" era, the so-called post PC era? which this review never touched.
  • richard mensah - Monday, May 23, 2011 - link

    i love this
  • omkarphatak - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    I see no reason why one should shell out mor than $800 for this contraption..

    http://www.buzzle.com/articles/which-is-better-ipa...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now